Restrictive covenants
Discussion
In the scenario
our house was built on the old neighbours land . We Own A & B , both of which have separate covenants house was built circa 1990
Covenant A was drawn up in 1939 .
The Purchaser for himself and the persons deriving title under him
hereby covenants with the Vendor for the benefit of her adjoining and
neighbouring land
(1) NOT to erect or permit to be erected on the said land any building
other than one private dwellinghouse with or without a suitable motor
house.
(2) TO plant forthwith and for ever maintain a good and sufficient
growing hedge along the Eastern boundary of the said land.
(3) NOT to cut down any trees in existence upon the said land
Covenant B
A Conveyance of the land tinted blue on the filed plan and other land
dated 14 December 1956 contains the
following covenants:-
The Purchaser for himself and his successors in title and to the intent
that the benefit of this covenant may be annexed to and run with each
and every part of the land of the Vendor adjoining or near the land
hereby conveyed hereby covenants with the Vendor as follows:-
(a) Not to erect or permit to be erected on the said land any building
whatsoever
(b) To plant forthwith and for ever after maintain a good and
sufficient growing hedge along the whole of the eastern boundary of the
said land.
A Conveyance of the land in this title dated 16 February 1990
(i) Within one month of the date hereof to erect and forever
thereafter to maintain a six foot high close boarded fence with wooden
posts on the western and northern boundaries of the property hereby
conveyed between the points marked A B and C on the plan annexed hereto
(ii) Not to erect any building on the land hereby conveyed other than
one private dwellinghouse with a suitable garage
(iii) Not to use for permit to be used any dwellinghouse on the land
hereby conveyed for any purpose other than as a private dwellinghouse
only and not to use any garage erected on the land hereby conveyed or
permit the same to be used other than as a private garage in connection
with the dwellinghouse to which it belongs and no trade or business
shall be carried out on the land hereby conveyed or any part thereof
(iv) Not to park any vehicle on the driveway coloured yellow on the
plan annexed hereto and not to obstruct the said driveway
The Purchasers and their successors in title will not breed dogs
or cats nor keep pigs bees or chickens on the land hereby conveyed."
It came to light as the wife wanted a few Chickens , The neighbours moved in in 1993 , they know nothing of the covenants and are quite happy if we have a few chickens as im more than happy for them to have eggs .similary they don't object to a office building at the bottom of A
Also when we bought the property in 2012 there was a small shed at the bottom of A which the sellers removed , Id like to build a small office at the bottom of the garden , present neighbours have no objection , how best to proceed without it costing a fortune
the area A is 1939 so would that be null and void now ?
A Conveyance of the land in this title dated 16 February 1990 does this refer to A& B or just B ?
our house was built on the old neighbours land . We Own A & B , both of which have separate covenants house was built circa 1990
Covenant A was drawn up in 1939 .
The Purchaser for himself and the persons deriving title under him
hereby covenants with the Vendor for the benefit of her adjoining and
neighbouring land
(1) NOT to erect or permit to be erected on the said land any building
other than one private dwellinghouse with or without a suitable motor
house.
(2) TO plant forthwith and for ever maintain a good and sufficient
growing hedge along the Eastern boundary of the said land.
(3) NOT to cut down any trees in existence upon the said land
Covenant B
A Conveyance of the land tinted blue on the filed plan and other land
dated 14 December 1956 contains the
following covenants:-
The Purchaser for himself and his successors in title and to the intent
that the benefit of this covenant may be annexed to and run with each
and every part of the land of the Vendor adjoining or near the land
hereby conveyed hereby covenants with the Vendor as follows:-
(a) Not to erect or permit to be erected on the said land any building
whatsoever
(b) To plant forthwith and for ever after maintain a good and
sufficient growing hedge along the whole of the eastern boundary of the
said land.
A Conveyance of the land in this title dated 16 February 1990
(i) Within one month of the date hereof to erect and forever
thereafter to maintain a six foot high close boarded fence with wooden
posts on the western and northern boundaries of the property hereby
conveyed between the points marked A B and C on the plan annexed hereto
(ii) Not to erect any building on the land hereby conveyed other than
one private dwellinghouse with a suitable garage
(iii) Not to use for permit to be used any dwellinghouse on the land
hereby conveyed for any purpose other than as a private dwellinghouse
only and not to use any garage erected on the land hereby conveyed or
permit the same to be used other than as a private garage in connection
with the dwellinghouse to which it belongs and no trade or business
shall be carried out on the land hereby conveyed or any part thereof
(iv) Not to park any vehicle on the driveway coloured yellow on the
plan annexed hereto and not to obstruct the said driveway
The Purchasers and their successors in title will not breed dogs
or cats nor keep pigs bees or chickens on the land hereby conveyed."
It came to light as the wife wanted a few Chickens , The neighbours moved in in 1993 , they know nothing of the covenants and are quite happy if we have a few chickens as im more than happy for them to have eggs .similary they don't object to a office building at the bottom of A
Also when we bought the property in 2012 there was a small shed at the bottom of A which the sellers removed , Id like to build a small office at the bottom of the garden , present neighbours have no objection , how best to proceed without it costing a fortune
the area A is 1939 so would that be null and void now ?
A Conveyance of the land in this title dated 16 February 1990 does this refer to A& B or just B ?
Edited by Purosangue on Friday 10th April 20:27
If the beneficiary of a covenant fails to enforce it then they will eventually lose the right to enforce it.
So as it appears the current neighbours don't mind then you could just crack on.
Or you could offer to pay their fees plus something extra to grease the wheels and get the covenants removed
So as it appears the current neighbours don't mind then you could just crack on.
Or you could offer to pay their fees plus something extra to grease the wheels and get the covenants removed
Purosangue said:
It came to light as the wife wanted a few Chickens , The neighbours moved in in 1993 , they know nothing of the covenants and are quite happy if we have a few chickens as im more than happy for them to have eggs
48k said:
Purosangue said:
It came to light as the wife wanted a few Chickens , The neighbours moved in in 1993 , they know nothing of the covenants and are quite happy if we have a few chickens as im more than happy for them to have eggs
cheers
There are many types of covenant.
Firstly who is the covenant owner ? Was the converter such that it remained with the house or the owner in 1939.
The 1939 owner can only enforce if they have reason to do so. They don't as they don't live there anymore.
If the covenant runs with the house then they will have the right to enforce.
Covenants are real. As an estate we are enforcing one from 1929 now with consequences in the millions.
So you do need to find out the exact nature of the covenant.
If they want to enforce or not is of course a different matter. Their. Conveyancer will have informed them when they bought of the covenant and I would think chickens would annoy most people.
They must take action pretty much as soon as they are aware of the breach. Their remedy x years down the line would be weak.
Firstly who is the covenant owner ? Was the converter such that it remained with the house or the owner in 1939.
The 1939 owner can only enforce if they have reason to do so. They don't as they don't live there anymore.
If the covenant runs with the house then they will have the right to enforce.
Covenants are real. As an estate we are enforcing one from 1929 now with consequences in the millions.
So you do need to find out the exact nature of the covenant.
If they want to enforce or not is of course a different matter. Their. Conveyancer will have informed them when they bought of the covenant and I would think chickens would annoy most people.
They must take action pretty much as soon as they are aware of the breach. Their remedy x years down the line would be weak.
Jeremy-75qq8 said:
There are many types of covenant.
Firstly who is the covenant owner ? Was the converter such that it remained with the house or the owner in 1939.
The 1939 owner can only enforce if they have reason to do so. They don't as they don't live there anymore.
If the covenant runs with the house then they will have the right to enforce.
Covenants are real. As an estate we are enforcing one from 1929 now with consequences in the millions.
So you do need to find out the exact nature of the covenant.
If they want to enforce or not is of course a different matter. Their. Conveyancer will have informed them when they bought of the covenant and I would think chickens would annoy most people.
They must take action pretty much as soon as they are aware of the breach. Their remedy x years down the line would be weak.
The covenants are included in the first post, Firstly who is the covenant owner ? Was the converter such that it remained with the house or the owner in 1939.
The 1939 owner can only enforce if they have reason to do so. They don't as they don't live there anymore.
If the covenant runs with the house then they will have the right to enforce.
Covenants are real. As an estate we are enforcing one from 1929 now with consequences in the millions.
So you do need to find out the exact nature of the covenant.
If they want to enforce or not is of course a different matter. Their. Conveyancer will have informed them when they bought of the covenant and I would think chickens would annoy most people.
They must take action pretty much as soon as they are aware of the breach. Their remedy x years down the line would be weak.
48k said:
Purosangue said:
It came to light as the wife wanted a few Chickens , The neighbours moved in in 1993 , they know nothing of the covenants and are quite happy if we have a few chickens as im more than happy for them to have eggs
hidetheelephants said:
48k said:
Purosangue said:
It came to light as the wife wanted a few Chickens , The neighbours moved in in 1993 , they know nothing of the covenants and are quite happy if we have a few chickens as im more than happy for them to have eggs
Edited by 48k on Sunday 12th April 08:13
NortonES2 said:
Classic bullying tacticsHopefully the residents will fight fire with fire if a swift "f
k off" letter doesn't work NortonES2 said:
The covenants on new housing development property usually only matter for a few years while the developer sells all the plots and after a period no one cares about them any more. Here long after the plots have been finished an enterprising outfit has purchased the covenant rights and looks to extracting cash from the home owners. If the home owners don't pay then they later have difficulty when selling. This type of thing could be a time bomb for many home owners as buying conveyancing solicitor would need to identify every little possible covenant transgression where previously no one cared.
NortonES2 said:
I guess that's what scumsuckers do when they're run out of diesel emissions claims to process.There was a restrictive covenant on our bungalow when we moved in saying that caravans nor motor caravans could be parked forward of the property line. As the property was built in 1968 and the builder folded in 1982 we chose to ignore it. Instead we took out a lifetime indemnity policy just in case any neighbour had time (and money) on their hands and wanted to kick off.
Fortunately all the neighbours are lovely and our Motorhome is mostly shielded by bushes anyway plus we are away in it for decents of the year too.
Fortunately all the neighbours are lovely and our Motorhome is mostly shielded by bushes anyway plus we are away in it for decent
s of the year too.NortonES2 said:
Nice little earner for minimal outlay and effort.48k said:
No, section 12 applies to any occupied land including back gardens. The act trumps all restrictive covenants. But they must not cause a nuisance. This comes up fairly regularly on smallholding and poultry forums.
Is there any definition of nuisance in this context?Edited by 48k on Sunday 12th April 08:13
Simpo Two said:
NortonES2 said:
I guess that's what scumsuckers do when they're run out of diesel emissions claims to process.Someone from the road should have bought the title themselves.
Fraser Karlsen has bought 80 other titles to pursue, so why not club together £1k each and pay someone to whack him, it would be far cheaper.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff